“And unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days shall be cut short.”

– Matthew 24:22

In our journey through the Olivet Discourse, the passage at hand has a number of interesting issues with which I will deal. They include: the cutting short of days, no life would be saved, and who are the elect? I shall proceed to deal with them.

The Cutting Short of Days

Three-quarters rapture advocate, Marvin Rosenthal, says ” The Lord is teaching that the Great Tribulation will be cut short.” [1] He continues: ” The shortening of the Great Tribulation to less than three and one-half years is one of the most important truths to be grasped if the chronology of end-time events is to be understood.” [2] Does this text teach that the Lord will cut short the number of days prophesied elsewhere from 1260 days (Rev. 11:3; 12:6)? Will the Great Tribulation be less than 1260 days? Simply put, no! What does it teach?

First of all, only Mark (13:20) has a parallel passage to Matthew, while Luke does not. Luke’ s omission of this verse is perhaps due to the fact that his focus is upon a.d. 70,[3] thus this statement relating to the future tribulation would not be appropriate. Mark tells us specially that it is ” the Lord” who had cut short those days. Otherwise, there is no significant difference in the two passages.

The Greek word for ” cut short” has the core meaning ” to cut off,” or, when applied to time ” to cut short.” [4] Dr. Randolph Yeager notes that the verb used both in Matthew and Mark means ” ‘ lopped off’ , ‘ mutilated.’ To shorten. Always in the New Testament in a chronological sense- Mt. 24:22, 22 Mk. 13:20, 20.” [5] It is significant to note that both verbs (in Matthew and Mark) ” are all in the aorist tense and indicative mood with the augment,” declares Dr. Renald Showers. ” Aorist tense verbs have no time significance except when they are in the indicative mood with the augment. That form is used to express past time.[6]” [7]. What does this mean?

Dr. Showers tells us that ” a number of scholars have concluded that since the two verbs in Mark 13:20 are in that form, they are expressing action in the past and therefore have significant bearing on the meaning of Jesus’ statement.” [8] What is that bearing? It is that the ” aorist tenses are prophetic pasts: God has already decided about the future,” [9] as one scholar explains. Another says, ” The future tense interprets the preceding ‘ had been shortened’ as having a future reference (like the Hebrew ‘ prophetic perfect’ ).” [10] This means that the cutting short, spoken of by our Lord in both Matthew and Mark, is some thing that has already taken place in the past when God’ s plan for history was put forth before the creation of the world. ” The aor. Tenses put this action in the past,” concludes Ezra Gould. ” The language is proleptic, stating the event as it already existed in the Divine decree.” [11]

Marvin Rosenthal’ s conjecture that these passages support his mistaken view that the Great Tribulation will be cut short of its Divinely decreed 1260 days does not hold up under scrutiny of the biblical text. Dr. Showers explains as follows:

Jesus was teaching that God in the past had already shortened the Great Tribulation. He did so in the sense that in the past He determined to cut it off at a specific time rather than let it continue indefinitely. In His omniscience, God knew that if the Great Tribulation were to continue indefinitely, all flesh would perish from the earth. To prevent that from happening, in the past God sovereignly set a specific time for the Great Tribulation to end.[12]

Said another way, God, in His omniscience, knew that if He let the Great Tribulation go 1320 days (an arbitrary number for the sake of illustration), then all flesh would be wiped out. Therefore, in eternity past when God was planning this time of history, He cut it short to 1260 days, so that the elect would in fact be saved.

No Life Would Have Been Saved

We have already seen previously that for Satan and the Antichrist their goal for these events is to destroy the Jewish people. Why does the Devil want to do that? He believes that if he can destroy the Jews, then He will be able to prevent the second coming, since Christ’ s return is a response to the converted Jewish remnant’ s request for physical deliverance. Satan believes that if he can prevent a key event in God’ s predestined plan for history from occurring then he will have defamed God and proven his slander that God is not worthy of His exalted position. He cannot succeed because God is faithful to fulfill His word.

So what does the phrase ” no life would have been saved” (lit. ” all flesh would not be saved” ) mean in light of Christ’ s prophetic sermon? There are two views that I think are worthy of consideration and they revolved around the meaning of the term ” no life.” Does it refer to the Jewish remnant, which is destined for salvation during this time, or does Christ have in mind all humanity? First, I agree with the general consensus among commentators that salvation in this context refers to physical deliverance and not salvation from one’ s sins (i.e., justification), because the danger in this context is physical, not spiritual.[13]

Before studying and writing this current commentary, I held the view that ” no life,” or ” no flesh” was a reference to Israel. I have changed my mind and now think that this phrase refers to all humanity. Why have I changed? I have changed my mind primarily because of the lexical data (i.e., how a word or phrase is used in other instances). Dr. Stanley Toussaint explains:

BAG[14] take pasa sarx to mean every person, everyone. With the negative they take it to mean no person, nobody and list Matthew 24:22 and Mark 13:20 as instances of this meaning. The expression pasa sarx comes from the Septuagint which in turn looks at the Hebraism kol basar “all flesh.” Gesenius[15] says this Hebrew construction means “all living creatures . . . especially all men, the whole human race . . . ” Therefore, to interpret “all flesh” in Matthew 24:22 and Mark 13:20 as referring to Jews living in Judea in a. d. 70 is too limiting. “All flesh” describes all humanity.[16]

Dr. Craig Evans concurs:

reflects Semitic idiom (e.g., Gen 9:11: ” never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of a flood” , Isa 40:5: ” all flesh shall see it together” ). . . . the warning that the period of tribulation will be so severe that unless shortened it will extinguish human life argues that the prophecy portends more than the Jewish war. . . . but the fate of the whole of humanity did not hang in the balance.[17]

It appears that Satan’ s effort to destroy the Jews would result in the total annihilation of all humanity, were not for Christ’ s intervention at the second advent. This fact provides us with further insight into the purposes of Christ’ s return.

Who Are The Elect?

The term ” the elect” is uttered three times by Jesus in the Olivet discourse (Matt. 14:22, 24, 31; also in Mark 13:20, 22, 27). I believe that all three uses must refer to the same entity in each instance. They clearly refer, in context, to some group of believers during the tribulation. Since the church has been raptured, it cannot refer to her. Thus, does ” the elect” reference saved Jews and Gentiles, or only the Jewish remnant? I believe that this term refers to the Jewish remnant, primarily because of contextual factors.

While it is true that the term ” the elect” is used in the New Testament Epistles of church age believers (i.e., both Jews and Gentiles) (see Rom. 8:33; Col. 3:12; 2 Tim. 2:10; Titus 1:1), it is also true that this term is used in a variety of other ways. Note multiple uses as follows: Rufus, a choice man (Rom. 16:13); elect angels (1 Tim. 5:21); of Jewish believers (1 Pet. 1:1; 2:9); Christ a choice building stone (1 Pet. 2:4, 6); a chosen lady (2 John 1); a chosen sister (2 John 13). In the Old Testament the term ” elect” is used in the following references to Israel: Isaiah 42:1; 43:20; 45:4; 65:9; 65:15; 65:22; Psalm 89:3; 105:6, 43; 106:5; 1 Chronicles 16:13. The verbal form of ” to choose” is used dozens of times in relation to Israel in the Old Testament (i.e., Deut. 7:6). Even though a majority of the biblical occurrences refer to Israel, usage must always be determined by how it is used in a specific context. ” In this context, it is most likely used regarding the nation,” concludes Dr. Ed Glasscock. ” Daniel identifies this time as ‘ decreed for your people and your holy city,’ indicating that Israel, not the church or mankind in general, will be the center of the Tribulation suffering.” [18]

We have seen that the term elect has a fairly wide range of usage. ” Out of every dispensation there will be some gathered of God’ s mere mercy and sovereignty. These are ‘ the elect’ of that dispensation,” explains Robert Govett. ” Therefore the term has as many special meanings as there are dispensations.” [19] But since the focus of this passage is upon Israel it is not mystery that Christ has them in mind. William Kelly says, ” the evidence unmistakably points to a converted body of Jews in the latter day, not standing in church light and privilege, but having Jewish hopes, and while awaiting the Messiah.” [20] The term ” the elect” is most likely used because Christ looks forward to those belonging to the Jewish remnant, though not yet saved, they are chosen to such a destiny- the elect. Maranatha!

(To Be Continued . . .)

 

Endnotes
[1] Marvin Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990), pp. 108-09.

[2] Rosenthal, Pre-Wrath Rapture, p. 111.

[3] See Alan Hugh M’ Neile, The Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: MacMillan, 1915), p. 350.

[4] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, a translation and adaptation by William F. Arndt & F. Wilbur Gingrich (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 442.

[5] Randolph O. Yeager, The Renaissance New Testament, 18 Vols. (Bowling Green, Ken.: Renaissance Press, 1978), vol. 3, p. 301.

[6] H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1927), p. 193.

[7] Renald Showers, Maranatha: Our Lord, Come! A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church (Bellmawr, NJ: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, Inc., 1995), p. 51.

[8] Showers, Maranatha, p. 51

[9] W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1997), vol. 3, p. 351.

[10] Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution, second edition, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), p. 484.

[11] Ezra P. Gould, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Gospel According to St. Mark, (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1896), pp. 247-48.

[12] Showers, Maranatha, p. 51

[13] See Morna D. Hooker, The Gospel According to Saint Mark (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991), p. 316.

[14] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, a translation and adaptation by William F. Arndt & F. Wilbur Gingrich (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957).

[15] William Gesenius, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, including the Biblical Chaldee, 13th. Edition, Translated from Latin by Edward Robinson (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1882).

[16] Stanley D. Toussaint, ” A Critique Of The Preterist View Of The Olivet Discourse,” unpublished paper presented at The Pre-Trib Study Group, Dec. 1995, no page number.

[17] Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27- 16:20 in Word Biblical Commentary, 34b (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001), p. 322.

[18] Ed Glasscock, Moody Gospel Commentary: Matthew (Chicago: Moody Press, 1997), p. 472.

[19] Robert Govett, The Prophecy on Olivet (Miami Springs, FL: Conley & Schoettle Publishing Co., [1881] 1985), p. 54.

[20] William Kelly, Lectures on The Gospel of Matthew (Sunbury, PA: Believers Bookshelf [1868] 1971), p. 492.

“for then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall.”

– Matthew 24:21

In the previous installment I surveyed some of the biblical teaching on the great tribulation. It will not come as a surprise to most of you that many do not see the tribulation as a yet future time. Historicists and preterists believe that much, if not all of the tribulation has already occurred. Therefore, if one denies the futurity of the tribulation then it produces a great distortion of biblical prophecy.

Historicism

Historicism teaches that the events of the tribulation, as noted in the book of Revelation, have been occurring throughout the entire 2,000 years of the current church age. Historicist, Steve Wohlberg, says, ” Historicism is the belief that the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation find fulfillment throughout the history of Christianity.” [1] They usually teach that the six seal, six trumpet and seven bowl judgments are cyclical of seven major judgments throughout the history of the church. Generally, they believe that we are awaiting the breaking of the seventh seal, which will complete the judgments of revelation (i.e., the tribulation), lead to the events of Armageddon and then the second coming. Thus, according to historicism, the time of the tribulation is equated with what has been thus far about 2,000 years of church history, with only Armageddon and the second coming still in the future.

The historicist scheme will not work if the prophetic events of the tribulation are taken literally. Historicists have to allegorize many details of biblical prophecy in order to make their system appear to explain Scripture. For example, they turn 1260 days (Rev. 11:3; 12:6) into 1260-years, the antichrist is not a person but the papal system of Roman Catholicism and entities like angels (the three angelic witnesses of Revelation 14) turn out to be humans what have lived in the past during the current church age. Historicists generally regard the belief that the tribulation and most Bible prophecy still awaits a future fulfillment as a Roman Catholic plot implemented by the Jesuits in the sixteenth century.[2] Historicism says that we are in the tribulation now, even though most of it has already passed. Such a view is not supported by Christ’ s explanation of the great tribulation in Matthew 24.

Preterism

Modern preterists go even further than historicists and say that the entire time of the tribulation is totally past and that it was entirely completed by a.d. 70. Preterist, Dr. Kenneth Gentry says, ” I hold that the Tribulation occurs in our distant past in the first century; . . . I hold that the Tribulation closes out the Jewish-based, old covenant order, and establishes the new covenant (Christian) order as the conclusive redemptive-historical reality.” [3] ” This statement of Christ is indisputably clear- and absolutely demanding of a first-century fulfillment of the events in the preceding verses, including the Great Tribulation (v. 21),” [4] declares Dr. Gentry. So how does Dr. Gentry take Matthew 24:21? He says, ” This is prophetic hyperbole.” He further explains: ” Clearly, the unique-event language is common parlance in prophetic literature. We must not interpret it in a woodenly literal manner.” [5]

What does he mean by ” prophetic hyperbole” ? Dr. Gentry cites Exodus 11:6, Ezekiel 5:9; 7:5- 6, and Daniel 9:12[6] as examples of other passages using similar language. Further, Dr. Gentry argues that the Flood of Noah was a worse judgment than described in Matthew 24 since it ” destroys the entire world except one family.” [7] I believe there are a number of errors in Dr. Gentry and preterist thinking at this point. First, they generalize many of the specifics of a given text that limit the scope of these absolute descriptions. These passages that preterists cite are all limited in scope, not simply the greatest disaster of any time, place, or thing. A few years ago I wrote Hebrew Christian scholar, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum and presented these same arguments made by Dr. Gentry’ s fellow preterist Gary DeMar a few years ago. Here is Dr. Fruchtenbaum’ s able response:

As for Exodus 11:6, the focus here is specifically on one country, which is the nation of Egypt. Furthermore, the verse is not saying that what happened with the ten plagues was the worst judgment that Egypt will ever experience and, therefore, the correlation between 14 million and 55 million is irrelevant. The text is saying that there was not such a great cry in all the land of Egypt in the past, nor will there be such a great cry in the land of Egypt in the future. The emphasis is not on the judgment itself but on the Egyptian response to the judgment. The first-born son of every Egyptian family died, but the remainder of the family was spared, so every single family was affected. In the tribulation, there is no need to assume that every family will be affected and, furthermore, rather than merely one or two members of the family, whole families might be destroyed; and if whole families are destroyed, there will be no one to mourn for that particular family. Another point is the Bible says that one quarter of the world’s population will be destroyed, but mentions the world population in general and does not apply that exactly twenty-five percent of the Egyptian population will be destroyed. In other words, whether we speak of twenty-five percent or seventy-five percent of the earth’s population destroyed, most of it is among the nations outside of the Middle East and, therefore, will not effect Egypt to the same degree as it would affect, let’ s say North America or Europe. Therefore, there might be a lot less death in Egypt than there would be elsewhere, and it still might be less than those who died in the tenth plague. In other words, Exodus 11:6 simply does not present such a great problem.

Finally, concerning Ezekiel 5:9-10, . . . There are two implications. The first implication is that what happened in a.d. 70 was far more severe than what happened in 586 b.c. That point is true. But the point of Ezekiel 5:9 is that God, in this case, is going to perform a judgment of the type that He has not done before and will not do again, and the type of judgment was that one third will die by plague and famine, one third will die by the sword, and one third will be scattered to the four winds. It did not happen that way in a.d. 70, and it will not happen that way in the tribulation. What Ezekiel is describing is something that happened uniquely in the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem when the inhabitants were equally divided into thirds with two thirds dying in two different ways, and one third surviving but under divine judgment were scattered. No such three-fold division equally happened in a.d. 70. Even the tribulation where it does mention in Zechariah 13:8-9 that two thirds will die and one third will survive, it does not say that the two thirds will die in an equal two halves by sword and by famine. Furthermore, the remaining surviving third is not under divine judgment and remaining surviving third is not under divine judgment and scattered, but rather, they are saved and regathered. So, Ezekiel’ s words can be taken as literally true; what he said did happen to Jerusalem and was unique to the Babylonian destruction.

The second implication is his statement under point 4: ” The flood was obviously a greater tribulation.” This is true as far as tribulation in general. However, here we are dealing specifically with the Jewish people and Jerusalem. The focus of the flood was not on the Jewish people, since Jewish history had not begun as yet. Nor was the focus on Jerusalem since that city had not existed yet. The Noahic flood destroyed the world in general and was the worst flood that ever was or will be. But Ezekiel’s prophecy focuses specifically on the Jewish people and Jerusalem which was not or will not be destroyed by flood. And while God will once again destroy the mass of humanity, according to Isaiah 24, it will no be by means of water but by means of fire.

So, none of these ” problems” that Gary DeMar is presenting are in any sense a great problem. They are all solvable if we remain with their own context and we move carefully through the actual words and to what they are referring.[8]

These issues are not a problem if one follows the context that governs the words of these passages. It is quite clear that if the plain meaning of the text is allowed to stand then a first century interpretation is precluded. Preterists must revert to sophistry in order to say why the text does not mean what it says so they can suggest a meaning in support of their view. Interestingly, they tend to only take this approach with given passages that do not appear to support their thesis, but take verses plainly that appear to support their views, even when figures of speech are embedded in the text. No, the great tribulation has not yet happened, but the world is now being prepared for this future time (2 Thess. 2:6- 7).

The Book of Daniel

In Matthew 24:21 Christ speaks of a yet future time that will be the worst time in the history of the world for the Jewish people. Nevertheless, He will deliver those who come to faith in Him as their Messiah from this terrible time (Matt. 24:31). These things must take place in order that God’ s plan for history to work out issues of good and evil. How do we know this? Matthew 24:21 is a quote by Jesus from Daniel 12:1.

The entire context of Daniel 12 provides further information about what Christ has said in Matthew 24:21. Daniel’ s response is not surprising to the revelation of the tribulation as we see in Daniel 12:8: ” As for me, I heard but could not understand; so I said, ‘ My lord, what will be the outcome of these events?’ ” This is often a question that comes into our mind when we read of the events of the tribulation. God’ s answer through the angel is as follows: ” And he said, ‘ Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time. Many will be purged, purified and refined; but the wicked will act wickedly, and none of the wicked will understand, but those who have insight will understand.’ ” (Dan. 12:9-10)

God’ s purpose of the tribulation, especially the great tribulation (last three and a half years), is to purge out those unbelieving Jews through the events of this time and to bring to faith the elect Jewish remnant. We know that the events described in both Matthew and Daniel have not yet in the past lead to the mass conversion of the Jews as these passages indicate. That the conversion of the Jews is yet to occur, no Christian would doubt. Since the tribulation precedes and gives rise to their conversion, there is no doubt that it too lies in a time future to our own day. Maranatha!

(To Be Continued . . .)

 

Endnotes
[1] Steve Wohlberg, The Antichrist Chronicles: What Prophecy Teachers Aren’ t Telling You! (Fort Worth: Texas Media Center, 2001), p. 86. (Italics original)

[2] See Steve Wohlberg’ s chapter called ” The Evil Empire of Jesuit Futurism,” in The Left Behind Deception: Revealing Dangerous Errors About The Rapture And The Antichrist (Coldwater, MI: Remnant Publications, 2001), pp. 58-74.

[3] Kenneth L. Gentry Jr. in Thomas Ice and Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., The Great Tribulation: Past or Future? (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1999), p. 12. This is a book in which Dr. Gentry and I debate whether the tribulation is past or future. For a more extensive rebuttal of many aspects of the preterist position see Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice, editors, The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under Attack (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2003).

[4] Gentry, Great Tribulation, pp. 26-27.

[5] Gentry, Great Tribulation, p. 52.

[6] Gentry, Great Tribulation, pp. 55-56.

[7] Gentry, Great Tribulation, p. 56.

[8] Arnold Fruchtenbaum, personal letter to Thomas Ice, dated September 16, 1994.